European Union European Regional Development Fund 1 EU Interregional IVB NSR MP4 INTRODUCING A METHOD FOR MAPPING RECREATIONAL EXPERIENCE Innovation in two pilots in Sheffield Paper for internal use in MP4 Version: April 6 th , 2011 Andrej Christian Lindholst, Nicola Dempsey Mel Burton
20
Embed
INTRODUCING A METHOD FOR MAPPING RECREATIONAL …archive.northsearegion.eu/.../20121218175610_05innovatingrecmapp… · innovative method of analysing and mapping positive recreational
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
European Union
European Regional Development Fund
1
EU Interregional IVB NSR MP4
INTRODUCING A METHOD FOR MAPPING RECREATIONAL EXPERIENCE
Innovation in two pilots in Sheffield
Paper for internal use in MP4
Version: April 6th, 2011
Andrej Christian Lindholst,
Nicola Dempsey
Mel Burton
Andrej Christian Lindholst EU Interreg IVB NSR MP4 Internal paper Nicola Dempsey
Introducing a method for mapping recreational experience Mel Burton
2
Summary
The provision of recreational opportunities for urban populations forms an important and
long-standing planning and management objective. In this paper, ‘rec-mapping’, an
innovative method of analysing and mapping positive recreational experiences in urban
green spaces is explored and piloted within the UK planning context. Originating in the
Nordic countries, this on-site method can provide urban planners and designers with data
about the extent to which specific green spaces provide a range of user experiences to
develop and support appropriate recreational use. Considering a range of experiences
encountered when in such spaces currently does not form part of existing open space
assessment tools. The investigation reported here is based on the application of rec-mapping
in two test sites in Sheffield, South Yorkshire in early summer 2010. This paper critically
appraises a small-scale application of rec-mapping and recommends further explorations
within the UK planning context, as it adds to existing open space assessment by providing an
extra layer of information to analyse more fully the recreational function of urban green
spaces.
Keywords
Recreational facilities, town and city planning, urban generation
Andrej Christian Lindholst EU Interreg IVB NSR MP4 Internal paper Nicola Dempsey
Introducing a method for mapping recreational experience Mel Burton
3
1. INTRODUCTION 1
One long-term value and function of urban green spaces can be attributed to their potential 2
to support recreation activity which in turn contributes positively to the wellbeing and health 3
of urban populations. In the UK, this is reflected in the origins of public park establishment 4
during the industrialization era when they were created as spaces in which residents could 5
escape temporarily from everyday urban life, get some fresh air and take a walk: all long 6
identified as having health benefits (Conway, 1991). While leisure and recreational activities 7
today are different to those of the Victorian age, it can be argued that the ecological, social 8
and, economic values and functions remain mostly the same (Newton, 2007). In this way, 9
urban green spaces and their recreational function continue to form an important component 10
of the urban landscape. In a planning perspective, the challenge is to deal with the 11
recreational qualities of urban green spaces in a way that is meaningful and connects to the 12
urban population use of these spaces. 13
UK planning authorities often approach the conceptualization of recreational functions 14
through categorisations of urban green space using broad and arguably vague terminology 15
such as country park, city park, local park, garden, sports facility, woodland and playground 16
provided in inventories such as Planning Policy Guidance 17 (DCLG, 2002). Minimum quality 17
standards for facilities and levels of maintenance are set by national bodies and measured 18
using tools such as the Local Environmental Quality Survey of England (LEQSE) and the 19
Green Flag Awards. However, these tools do not measure the recreational value of these 20
urban green spaces or the experience to be had therein. Perhaps because recreational 21
quality is so deeply rooted in our understanding of urban green spaces, and these spaces 22
are routinely assessed through objective characteristics, standards and designs, this quality 23
is often not acknowledged in any systematic way as dependent on one’s personal 24
experience of a space rather than objective and quantitative measures. 25
It is argued in this paper that there is a real gap in methodological tools used in the UK which 26
measure use of urban green space which should be addressed in relation to one’s 27
experience in a space. What is here called ‘rec-mapping’ is part of a body of methodological 28
tools developed in Scandinavia which measure users’ experiences in green space to inform 29
the urban planning and design process. This paper puts forward the proposal that ‘rec-30
mapping’ could form part of this process in the UK by incorporating an assessment of 31
recreational experience, and provides a discussion of how ‘rec-mapping’ might address this. 32
The methodology is critically presented and has been tested in a small-scale pilot study with 33
planning professionals in two sites in Sheffield. The paper then discusses the methodological 34
challenges of applying ‘rec-mapping’ and provides reflections and recommendations. 35
36
2. QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT IN THE UK PLANNING AND DESIGN CONTEXT 37
The benefits of green and open space in urban areas have long been cited and recognised in 38
UK policy (DCLG, 2006: Bell et al., 2007). There has been a sustained commitment to 39
improving green and open space over the last decade or so in an attempt to stem the long-40
term decline in quality of parks and green spaces during the late 1970s-1990s (DCLG, 2007). 41
It is too early on in the current government’s tenure (from May 2010) to assess their political 42
Andrej Christian Lindholst EU Interreg IVB NSR MP4 Internal paper Nicola Dempsey
Introducing a method for mapping recreational experience Mel Burton
4
influence on the quality of parks and green spaces, although factors such as the abolition of 43
the Playbuilder programme alongside local authority budget cuts suggest that continuing 44
such open space improvements may be a considerable challenge. This sits within a suite of 45
policies which relate to sustainable communities and liveability which support the claims that 46
high quality living environments can have a positive influence on the everyday life of users 47
and residents (Dempsey, 2009). In practice, this manifests itself as the increasing use of 48
consultation which has become an important part of the formal urban planning and design 49
process in the UK. The 1999 Local Government Act made it a legal requirement for local 50
authorities to consult widely with users on aspects of the activities and services provided, 51
marking a move towards a modernised agenda of localised decision-making (Burgess et al, 52
2001). 53
In relation to open space provision in general, the planning process can be broken down into 54
a number of broad steps which are succinctly summarised by Cowan et al. (2010). Firstly 55
there are pre-application discussions which involve the client/ developer, the design team 56
and the local authority and include the creation of the project brief, the initial proposal and 57
any initial consultations. This is followed by the creation of the design and access statement 58
by the design team which is informed by a design review panel which may revise the 59
proposal itself. The application is then submitted which is followed by a process of appraisal 60
by firstly, consultees which follows formal consultation and secondly, the local authority. The 61
planning decision is then made by the local authority, with reference to these preceding 62
stages. It can be argued that qualitative assessment should form a part of consultation in the 63
planning process from the outset to ensure that user needs are fully taken into account. 64
There are several existing methods of qualitative assessment which measure open spaces at 65
varying levels of detail. These methods differ in terms of who provides the assessment and 66
how, the depth of the information provided and how it is used. At one end of the spectrum, 67
where relatively broad-brush data are collected, one example is the Local Environmental 68
Quality Survey of England (LEQSE). This is conducted by Keep Britain Tidy and measures 69
local environmental quality using a range of indicators including cleanliness, ‘environmental 70
crime’ such as graffiti and standards of maintenance of soft and hard landscaping (Keep 71
Britain Tidy, 2010) in identified areas of different land uses, including ‘recreation areas’. 72
Surveyors are specially trained and subjectivity is kept to a minimum. As they do not ask 73
users about their opinions this can be described as an ‘expert-led’ assessment method. A 74
more inclusive approach can be found in GreenSTAT, which allows residents to comment on 75
the quality of their local open spaces, and how well they are maintained and managed 76
(GreenSpace, 2006). This is an online tool which collates and aggregates individually 77
entered data anonymously for the use of park providers and managers as well as 78
GreenSpace, the charity which oversees GreenSTAT (CABE Space, 2010). Respondents 79
are asked to comment on aspects including their use of a particular green space and why 80
they do so as well as reasons for not using these spaces. The questions are closed providing 81
little opportunity for respondents to provide any in-depth commentary on what they like or 82
dislike about their local green spaces. The resulting datasets of ‘accurate and reliable visitor 83
feedback’ cannot be accessed by the general public: they can only be used by local authority 84
practitioners as part of their process of ‘informed decision making’ (GreenSpace, 2010). In 85
Andrej Christian Lindholst EU Interreg IVB NSR MP4 Internal paper Nicola Dempsey
Introducing a method for mapping recreational experience Mel Burton
5
this way, they can be used to inform green/ open space strategies and management plans 86
for specific spaces to identify where, for example, physical improvements might be made 87
(ibid.). 88
GreenSpace advises that GreenSTAT can be incorporated into entries for the Green Flag 89
Award. Partly developed in response to declining standards and a growing awareness of the 90
importance of urban green spaces in the UK, the Green Flag scheme has become a 91
significant benchmark for parks and green spaces which assesses and promotes high quality 92
urban green-spaces (DCLG, 2006). The Green Flag is awarded to parks and green spaces 93
according to a range of criteria, including objective measures such as cleanliness and 94
pesticide use, and the presence and implementation of a management and marketing plan 95
(Greenhalgh and Parsons, 2004). It also includes a qualitative assessment which measures 96
perceptions of how welcoming, safe and healthy a place feels. This is measured by the 97
visiting Green Flag judges who are drawn mainly from local authorities and the wider green 98
space sector (ibid.). While the Green Flag does not directly call on users for their perceptions 99
of, and attitudes towards, a particular green space, evidence must be provided to the judges 100
of community involvement, consultation and community-led activities. Specific reference is 101
made to recreation insofar as the management plan must ‘demonstrate that there are 102
appropriate levels of recreational facilities and opportunities for all sectors of the community’ 103
(Civic Trust, 2008, p. 12). So while there may be some data collected which calls on users’ 104
recreational experiences, they are aggregated and subsumed into the overall Green Flag 105
assessment: there is no formal place for such assessment in the method. While the Green 106
Flag Award puts the onus on the park providers and managers to forge and maintain good, 107
long-term relationships with community members, indicating that community consultation is 108
an ongoing process, and not just form a part of an evaluation exercise, there is no focus on 109
users’ recreational experience per se. 110
A more direct assessment of green space is provided by Spaceshaper which was developed 111
in the UK by the now defunct Commission for Architecture and Built Environment (CABE) as 112
a method of measuring quality of space combining quantitative and qualitative assessments 113
for application to spaces in need of improvement (CABE Space, 2007). Like the Green Flag 114
scheme, Spaceshaper is designed to form an ongoing evaluation tool as part of a long-term 115
approach to open space management. It is a participatory appraisal method which uses site 116
visits conducted by a group of stakeholder participants made up of residents and users, led 117
by a trained Spaceshaper facilitator. The workshops can be adopted into consultation 118
exercises, which can ‘help widen the discussion beyond just litter and anti-social behaviour’ 119
(ibid., p. 14). This allows the park or green space under scrutiny to be examined as a whole, 120
rather than as a group of individual components. Spaceshaper asks participants to rate the 121
site against a range of characteristics which relate to use, access, community, design and 122
how the space makes them feel. Spaceshaper has been used by local authorities (such as 123
Nottingham City Council) to gauge different users’ opinions of, and attitudes towards, their 124
green spaces and adopted as a means of assessment of quality before and after investment 125
(CABE, 2011). While Spaceshaper allows participants to comment on the activities and 126
opportunities provided by a space, it does not measure the recreational experience further 127
than asking how the participants ‘feels’ about a green space. Spaceshaper results have been 128
Andrej Christian Lindholst EU Interreg IVB NSR MP4 Internal paper Nicola Dempsey
Introducing a method for mapping recreational experience Mel Burton
6
applied in different ways including some incorporation into future urban designs and plans, 129
and adoption as a means of assessment by local authorities (CABE Space, 2007). 130
Finally, experiential landscape (EL) mapping offers a further example of measuring 131
experience in the environment. Applied at a variety of scales, EL mapping has been 132
developed to shed light on how people attach significance and value to places, how people 133
orientate themselves when in an environment and how a sense of belonging is developed 134
(Thwaites and Simkins, 2007). Its main purpose is to explore the concept of place character, 135
partly through one’s different experiences of that place, including recreational. One’s spatial 136
experience is represented by four concepts: centre (the ‘here’), direction (‘there’), transition 137
(‘change’) and area (‘overall coordination) (ibid.). Examples of its application include 138
contribution to a rural village’s design statement through workshops and interviews with 139
residents, and participation with schoolchildren to create designs for improving school 140
grounds (Experiential Landscape, 2010). This differs from ‘rec-mapping’ as it is broader in its 141
scope and scale, focusing on a wide range of experiences. 142
The discussion above highlights the contribution that qualitative assessment of open space 143
can make to the urban planning and design process, however it should be noted that such 144
inclusion is not statutory. These methods provide varying degrees of information about users 145
and their requirements when using spaces. However, none of these methods directly 146
measure one’s recreational experience when in a particular green space, pointing to a 147
potential gap that needs to be addressed. This is particularly important when applying for 148
funding, or protecting existing budgets as evidence will be required to demonstrate how 149
spending makes a difference to residents and users of open spaces (ibid.). The next section 150
presents rec-mapping as a method which addresses this gap. 151